Our future lies in coach's hands

By Craig Foster

AUSTRALIA'S next generation, our under-20 national team, begins qualification for the 2007 under-20 World Cup with a match against China in India tomorrow.

First spot in a comfortable group also containing United Arab Emirates and Thailand should ensure they make the semi-finals, and qualify as one of the top four Asian nations.

National junior teams coach Ange Postecoglou will be under intense scrutiny, given public interest in the development of future Socceroos, particularly in the wake of the recent retirement of four senior internationals and debate about their potential long-term replacements.

Advertisement

After six youth World Cups, Ange has had three exits at the group stage, two round of 16, and a quarter-finals appearance. He was heavily criticised last year when the Joeys under 17s lost in the qualifiers against Laos, and for poor form last year by the 20s in the Netherlands and the 17s in Peru.

The Peru showing was blamed on tough group opponents in Mexico and Turkey, but ultimately it was the poor organisation, lack of cohesion, constant loss of possession, defensive style and lack of goal threat that brought condemnation.

As we head into the latest campaign the question must be this: what is the minimum acceptable level of achievement at youth World Cups for Australia, and what should be the performance criteria for our youth national coaches?

A results-based criteria will differ with age but should have exit from the group stage as a minimum benchmark. The overriding criteria should be performance-based - to play outstanding football.

Youth football is a delicate balance between development and results, with the latter gaining importance as age increases, so that at U17s level player development is paramount, while at U20s and Olympic level, results have greater weight, without neglecting playing quality football to prepare players for a smooth transition to the Socceroos.

At 17, the players are learning how to deal with tactical situations, to adjust during games to opponents, and maintain possession against various football styles. At this age the style of football played and the performance are as important as results.

So important is player development at this age that France withdrew their team from U17s competition so as not to expose them to a win-at-all-costs mentality too early.

The French were not interested in their kids playing expedient football for junior World Cup results when they are intent on teaching them key principles of attacking play for senior football.

The issue with the Joeys last year, aside from the group stage exit, was that any player development was minimal by virtue of the team playing poorly and defensively, when the imperative should be the opposite.

At U20s, however, young players need to add the ability to win to their now ingrained football technique and tactical awareness, so a coach needs to demonstrate a highly accomplished level of tactics for a team to progress through the tournament.

And the determining factor for every national coach today is this: the Socceroos have proven that Australians can play excellent tactical football against the world's best, when well coached and led.

Like coaches before him, Ange has at times been quick to blame player quality, but quality coaching showed the Socceroos could be taught, in quick time if need be, to play well against better technical teams.

Anything less than this should be unacceptable for a national team coach. No excuses.

The future of all our national coaches should rest on detailed technical analysis, a role for the anticipated technical director who will analyse every national team match at every level, and track the progression and qualities of the coach.

In the meantime several million technical directors around this country will be quick to praise or judge Ange and his team.